If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If you pay for 3 months of Sling they will give you a Roku 2 or a discounted Appletv.

Better to spend the $140 on a new AppleTV. I have an old and new. New one is a big leap, much better remote, better resolution, 7.1 sound compatibility, Siri (which if you have an iPhone allows HomeKit) etc

You'll need Orange/Sports for ESPNU, PAC12 and ESPN News. (You do get access to the watch ESPN app)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does the WatchESPN app come only with the Orange package, or is it part of the Sports pack?

Also for some reason I can't sign up for the Blue package without the order also including the Orange. And then I have to add the Sports pack on top. At this rate the new Dish (pseudo) a la carte plans will be cheaper.

No actually Fox Sports is only on Blue, can't be added to Orange. Fs1 is the only thing I really need to buy. I don't mind getting the Blue plus Sports pack, but was hoping that would include WatchESPN.

So what package do I need to get for all of my Utah needs? Orange plus sports?

The USC and Arizona games are on FS1, as are a number of basketball games. The PAC channels come with the Sports pack and FS1 is on Blue.

It might be worth getting Orange+Sports, then either adding Blue for the weeks of USC/ASU then cancelling if Sling will prorate service for the month, or bite the bullet and get the Full Meal Deal for Sept 23 through Nov 10.

The USC and Arizona games are on FS1, as are a number of basketball games. The PAC channels come with the Sports pack and FS1 is on Blue.

It might be worth getting Orange+Sports, then either adding Blue for the weeks of USC/ASU then cancelling if Sling will prorate service for the month, or bite the bullet and get the Full Meal Deal for Sept 23 through Nov 10.

Prob still cheaper than a sports bar.

So this is where it's a bit confusing with them.

ESPN is only in Orange. Fox Sports is only in Blue.

To get both you have to subscribe to Orange AND Blue, which is $40. But to get ESPNU you have to subscribe to the sports package as well.

And on top of that if you only do Orange, you get one stream. You have to have Blue or Orange And Blue to get 3 streams.

I actually just want *legal* access to the WatchESPN app, and will need to think of something else for FS1. I can very easily find illegal access to the app and feeds or borrow a friend's. It is only messy when I want to get them legally.

I always thought Katz was good for his connections but not so much for his writing or analysis. He always knew who was going where or what was happening. Maybe that's not so valuable anymore in a Twitter world. We all know who is going where and what is happening. We don't need Katz to break the story for us anymore. Just a half-baked thought that I'm sure SoCal will correct.

That is an interesting article, if not a bit solicitous of Scott. That said, as someone who lives in an area where the network is not available on cable packages and with physical limitations to get Dish, it seems a generation to wait until 2024 for the network to be untethered from cable or dish subscriptions so that I can simply pay them directly and watch.

I respect most of Scorcho's opinions. His assertion that this is a very good article is the rare one that misses the mark entirely. This is the article Larry Scott wants you to read to have you feel good about the direction the Pac-12 is moving in. At the same time, the word football appears all of five times in the story, all in cursory, afterthought tones.

This story is not from a reputable sports journalism platform. SportCal is an England-based sports marketing firm that is in no way in touch with the struggles and frustration Pac-12 fans feel. Not a single outside source was spoken to on the record on this story. It's as fluffy as cotton candy and not worth your 10 minutes to read it.

I respect most of Scorcho's opinions. His assertion that this is a very good article is the rare one that misses the mark entirely. This is the article Larry Scott wants you to read to have you feel good about the direction the Pac-12 is moving in. At the same time, the word football appears all of five times in the story, all in cursory, afterthought tones.

This story is not from a reputable sports journalism platform. SportCal is an England-based sports marketing firm that is in no way in touch with the struggles and frustration Pac-12 fans feel. Not a single outside source was spoken to on the record on this story. It's as fluffy as cotton candy and not worth your 10 minutes to read it.

Jon Wilner was the one who referenced this article in his last blog. That is where I came across it.

I readily admit that I am fascinated with the approach that the PAC 12 has taken in regards to sports programming. I'm intrigued by the forward thinking of not being a television entity but a content entity. I can see that by the time the next TV contracts roll around that the conference may have deals with ESPN, Fox along with Google, Twitter, Amazon and Facebook. While the PAC 12 may have sacrificed $$$ in the short term not being on Direct TV, I think they are the best positioned long term financially by owning their own content.

Jon Wilner was the one who referenced this article in his last blog. That is where I came across it.

I readily admit that I am fascinated with the approach that the PAC 12 has taken in regards to sports programming. I'm intrigued by the forward thinking of not being a television entity but a content entity. I can see that by the time the next TV contracts roll around that the conference may have deals with ESPN, Fox along with Google, Twitter, Amazon and Facebook. While the PAC 12 may have sacrificed $$$ in the short term not being on Direct TV, I think they are the best positioned long term financially by owning their own content.

i like to read about this stuff regardless of the source.

We're forward thinking ourselves out of relevance.

I'm as much a fan of the sports TV biz as anyone, or at least I make it a point to stay current. But we're seven years into life in the Pac-12 and six with Pac-12 nets and the $$$ gulf between us and the Big 10 and SEC is widening. We're well into the long term, and there's nothing to suggest the money is going to get better anytime soon. Our best assistants are taking similar jobs in other leagues. We're losing more and more top recruits outside the footprint. The Pac-12 network is part of the problem in our slow descent into irrelevancy. This story is nothing more than Larry talking about things few people care about. And what's so great about content if nobody's watching it? ... https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/21/p12n-xxxxx/

I'm as much a fan of the sports TV biz as anyone, or at least I make it a point to stay current. But we're seven years into life in the Pac-12 and six with Pac-12 nets and the $$$ gulf between us and the Big 10 and SEC is widening. We're well into the long term, and there's nothing to suggest the money is going to get better anytime soon. Our best assistants are taking similar jobs in other leagues. We're losing more and more top recruits outside the footprint. The Pac-12 network is part of the problem in our slow descent into irrelevancy. This story is nothing more than Larry talking about things few people care about. And what's so great about content if nobody's watching it? ... https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/21/p12n-xxxxx/

I think we are arguing 2 different things?

If PAC-12 Fandom were anywhere near Big 10/SEC levels, I would agree with you. Those conferences deserve to make more based on simple supply and demand. The market has dictated the PAC-12 pecking order and unfortunately the PAC-12 is better aligned with the Big XII and ACC.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I maintain that owning its own content will be valuable financially for the PAC-12 in the future years. A Direct TV contract with the PAC-12 would only yield another 1-2 million per school. It helps, but the gap is still wide. Unless you can somehow shift population and passion from East to West, I don't see an answer.

If PAC-12 Fandom were anywhere near Big 10/SEC levels, I would agree with you. Those conferences deserve to make more based on simple supply and demand. The market has dictated the PAC-12 pecking order and unfortunately the PAC-12 is better aligned with the Big XII and ACC.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I maintain that owning its own content will be valuable financially for the PAC-12 in the future years. A Direct TV contract with the PAC-12 would only yield another 1-2 million per school. It helps, but the gap is still wide. Unless you can somehow shift population and passion from East to West, I don't see an answer.

I agree that there are limitations based on geography and time zone constraints. Which makes our emphasis on the Olympic sports more restrictive. And who cares about China? Maybe first Larry should find a way to get more league games done before 11 p.m. EST before figuring out how to promote the league in foreign markets. Our TV efforts are a disaster, and recruits are taking notice.

Utah athletic director Chris Hill said he hasn’t been satisfied with the network either in its payouts or distribution. “From the ADs’ standpoint, we expected more,” he said ...

But those advances haven’t stemmed the criticism. The inability to land DirecTV, in particular, “is making the gap bigger and bigger” in comparison with the other conference networks, said Utah’s Hill.